https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-...game/101331000
I have also posted this in the Australian section of the forum.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-...game/101331000
I have also posted this in the Australian section of the forum.
https://www.queenslandjudgments.com..../qcat/2022/289
The judgement for those who are legally minded.
Most card counters, myself included, are excluded from casinos in Australia on the basis of "breach of gaming integrity." It will be interesting to see how persuasive this decision is in other Australian jurisdictions.
I think my problem when I appealed by exclusion based on dishonesty/breach of gaming integrity is that I merely went to the VCGLR (which is basically in Crown's back pocket). At least Nathan and Mark had a bit more of a fighting change with a truly impartial decision maker. Good on them, though. They were self represented, whereas The Star had a QC!
Casino Enemy No.1
[QUOTE=Koz84;306127]https://www.queenslandjudgments.com..../qcat/2022/289
The judgement for those who are legally minded.
Most card counters, myself included, are excluded from casinos in Australia on the basis of "breach of gaming integrity." It will be interesting to see how persuasive this decision is in other Australian jurisdictions.[/QUOTE
After reading the article and the judgement I must say that I agree with QCAT. Those blokes did nothing but take advantage of a situation that appeared before them and should not be labelled cheats or be subject to Exclusion Orders. This matter is quite different from the Phil Ivey case where game manipulation was involved. Still, there is a good chance that their names now appear on some banned list so they may face problems playing at high limits in some of our casinos in the future.
Casino Enemy No.1
In my opinion these two paragraphs are key:
[75] Mr Grant agreed that his plays deviated from the basic strategy and that he communicated strategy advice to Mr Anderson. He said that very few players play basic strategy in the casino. Mr Grant said that he is a very competitive player, and he will take into account all legally and publicly available information and that he is allowed to make assumptions about what card is coming next.
[149] I do not consider, as submitted by Star that Mr Grant and Mr Anderson used information not known to the casino or other players so that the proper conduct or integrity of gaming was affected by use of the information. How could one know whether noting the card or exercising skill gave rise to the outcome of the game? I think it is impossible to know on the evidence in this case.
To make a long story short: Casino get your f.cking act together in order to offer a game of chance that is fair and secure to all!
Bookmarks